Journalists Await Decisions by Supreme Court
Coskun Ak, former editor of "Superonline" Interactive Department, Burak Bekdil, a writer for the "Turkish Daily News, Mine Cevik, a "Turkish Daily News" director, and Nevzat Bingol, the former owner of "Gun (day) TV," who have all been tried and convicted of stories or broadcasts on freedom of expression, are anxious to find out about the approach of the supreme court of appeals after the EU reforms have been passed.
Caricature artists Askin Ayrancioglu and Seyyit Saatci, who could not get assigned to a court, are expecting the supreme court of appeals' decision on where they will be standing trial.
The caricature artists are awaiting "a court"
Caricaturists Seyit Saatci and Askin Ayrancioglu held an exhibition at the Boyabat Public Library in June 5-9. The police seized their caricatures and kept Saatci and Ayrancioglu in custody for a night. Now, Saatci and Ayrancioglu are unable to find a court that would be able to attend the trial. They are waiting for the supreme court of appeals to decide on a court with jurisdiction for the trial.
The caricature artists initially stood trial at a Boyabat court for charges of "insulting security forces," and faced between one to six years in prison.
In February 2002, their case was transferred to another Boyabat court because of the amendments to article 159 of the Turkish Penal Code. However, on September 26, 2002, the court dismissed the case saying it was not under its jurisdiction. The supreme court of appeals will decide on a court to attend the case.
"Internet" crime in the supreme court of appeals
In February 2002, Coskun Ak, the editor of Superonline Interactive Department, was charged with "insulting state institutions," for publishing an article on human rights violations in Turkey, within an Internet forum. He was fined 6 million Turkish lira (about 3.5 USD) as if he wrote the text himself.
According to lawyer Fikret Ilkiz, it was wrong to try Ak under the scope of Internet practices at a time when there were no regulations covering this area.
Lawyer Ilkiz also reacted against convicting Ak, as if he wrote the text published within the forum. Because the case is about Internet practices, and the defendant was fined before the latest regulations on Internet law, the awaited decision by the supreme court of appeals is even more significant.
Cevik and Bekdil punished for insulting the courthouse
Turkish Daily News director Mine Cevik and writer Burak Bekdil were charged with "insulting the spiritual individuality of the courthouse," and were convicted on May 2002.
An Ankara court handed out a suspended prison sentence of a year and eight months to Burak Bekdil, for ironically criticizing the courthouse in an article published by the Turkish Daily News on August 28, 2001.
Mine Cevik's sentence, which initially was a year in prison, was commuted to 10 months in prison because of good manners. According to Turkish press laws, prison sentences handed out to directors are commuted to fines.
Cevik's sentence was commuted to a fine of 1 billion 440 million Turkish lira (about 870 USD), and suspended for five years in line with article 59 of the Turkish Penal Code. Both journalists' lawyers appealed the cases. The supreme court of appeals will now handle the trials.
The decision by the supreme court of appeals will be significant for two things: How will the supreme court of appeals handle the decisions made before the EU reforms were passed; and being a judgmental authority, how will it handle the fact that "writing" was considered as a crime " against the judicial system," after the EU reforms?
Fines for Ahmet Kaya folk songs
Journalist Nevzat Bingol, the former owner of the Gun (day) TV in the southeastern province of Diyarbakir, was convicted for broadcasting the songs, "Where is My Youth Mother," "Happy Birthday," and "Everyone Mind Their Own Business," by Kurdish singer Ahmet Kaya.
On October 14, a Diyarbakir court fined Bingol 2 billion 932 million Turkish lira (about 1,700 USD).
The court convicted Bingol for broadcasting a concert by Ahmet Kaya, which was also broadcasted by "Channel 7." The court based its decision on article 11d of law no: 3257, and article 119/5 of the Turkish Penal Code.
Bingol was charged with violating law no: 3257 on cinema, video and music pieces, and accused with, "broadcasting banned pieces that could cause social incidents."
The Supreme Court's decision will demonstrate its attitude towards law no: 3257 on cinema, video and music pieces, that prohibit "broadcasting banned pieces that could cause social incidents." (BB/EA/NM)